You just engaged, in a very meaningful way, with critical theory. Despite your lack of seriousness, according to you, I think you added quite a bit to discourse in a serious way. That is critical theory.

I'll only comment on a few points:

1) I think you are correct, that for established editors, the value lies in giving criticism, not in receiving it. This is why I believe strongly in the value of critical formats like review sessions. Just as become better writers by reading, we become better editors by watching. However, in both cases, it must be active consumption, not passive consumption. Critical thinking as expressed in such formats is active.

2) I do make changes based on having previewers. Betatesters in common parlance. I've also made changes to finished videos based on an overwhelming response.

3) Like Pwolf, I will not change something I feel is vital to the vision. I don't really care if everyone hates it, or if they think it is less than technically proficient. If I go back and reconsider the issue, and I don't feel that the alteration (is it really "improvement" in this case) serves to preserve or better the vision... I cannot in good conscience make the alteration. If I ever have conflicts with reviewers, this is where it is most likely to come from. While I think the viewer experience is very, very important, ultimately as I find making videos to be matter of muse compulsion, vision will always trump criticism.

4) I don't believe in anonymous criticism. I believe everyone has the right to be anonymous when giving criticism, but I don't consider it proper critical behavior. It's a case of "shouldn't be done" rather than "can't be done." I disregard almost all anonymous criticism immediately, right off the bat. Positive and negative. This is why I so strongly oppose QCs and stars. In addition, while I do give QCs, I sign them "- Kionon." As you say, if I'm going to say it, I should have to be held accountable for it.

Taite wrote:Many people would not agree with me, but here's a different viewpoint.To me, criticism of videos is about 90% useless. I, for one, have never improved from the critique people have given me, but that doesn't mean I don't want it. I like it when people look into my video in depth, and I don't think it's a waste of time for the other person either.

I know I was basically on the same track with you in my previous post (where I said that a review can be an end in itself, not just a tool for the editor to improve him or her self) but, nonetheless, I'm curious how you perceive receiving criticism. In my experience you can either receive criticism passively, without spending much thought on it, or you can actively try to get out of your own perspective and adopt another and see your own video from a new angle. The former is easy and it's easy to shield your video from criticism. If you say that the best critic of your work can only be yourself you exclude others' points of view from the start.

My personal annoyance here is when editors start to blame random externalities to cover for the problems others see in their videos. I've also done this sometimes but I'm trying to get rid of the habit. For example (and let me be the bad guy here so no one thinks I'm targeting someone specific), my most recent amv (Limerence) got criticized for overuse of face close-ups and repeated facial expressions at the expense of dramatic content proper. Now if I were to blame external things I'd immediately start blaming the footage I was using ("But the anime is really just full of those kind of scenes. It's not like I had any choice!"). But I don't agree with this. Of course the footage you're using poses its own limitations but it's too easy to put the blame on that. I'm the editor. Even if the footage is hard to work with it's my job to try to make it look interesting. So my advice to you editors out there (including the more experienced ones) is to put some actual effort into thinking about the criticism you get. Don't just blame things you're not responsible for. It's too easy and shows you're not really trying to think about it.

As for this whole "critical theory" stuff, I don't take amvs seriously enough to really consider that. I'm passionate about amvs, kinda, and I can get pretty serious because people are just stupid sometimes, or I just feel like being serious, but critical theory? Way beyond me haha. I say, just keep doing what you're doing. We're all fine with our small comments, or our stupidly detailed long ones, or our mean comments, blah blah. By all means, get together and discuss it things like this "theory", like we are here, but I don't feel like it's necessary to get wrapped up in it either (not that anybody is, but it's just too serious for my taste is all)

I like it that we can spend 100 hours on a single amv, buy expensive equipment and put a lot of effort into organizing cons. All this "for fun". But when you use half an hour to discuss some theoretical points on a forum you're taking amvs way too seriously Just to be clear, I'm obviously not trying to accuse you of anything. I just don't really get why, despite of the seemingly formal and argumentative form, engaging in theoretical discussions should be so serious. If I take part in such debates it's not because I think very highly of amvs but because I genuinely just enjoy discussing and analyzing things, even if it means engaging in debates. Not to downplay the truthfulness of people like myself who take part in these conversations, but it's so often just mental masturbation, or more like mental circle jerking as there are many people involved in the discussion I don't see the problem

If I take part in such debates it's not because I think very highly of amvs but because I genuinely just enjoy discussing and analyzing things, even if it means engaging in debates. Not to downplay the truthfulness of people like myself who take part in these conversations, but it's so often just mental masturbation, or more like mental circle jerking as there are many people involved in the discussion I don't see the problem

know I was basically on the same track with you in my previous post (where I said that a review can be an end in itself, not just a tool for the editor to improve him or her self) but, nonetheless, I'm curious how you perceive receiving criticism. In my experience you can either receive criticism passively, without spending much thought on it, or you can actively try to get out of your own perspective and adopt another and see your own video from a new angle. The former is easy and it's easy to shield your video from criticism. If you say that the best critic of your work can only be yourself you exclude others' points of view from the start.

My personal annoyance here is when editors start to blame random externalities to cover for the problems others see in their videos. I've also done this sometimes but I'm trying to get rid of the habit. For example (and let me be the bad guy here so no one thinks I'm targeting someone specific), my most recent amv (Limerence) got criticized for overuse of face close-ups and repeated facial expressions at the expense of dramatic content proper. Now if I were to blame external things I'd immediately start blaming the footage I was using ("But the anime is really just full of those kind of scenes. It's not like I had any choice!"). But I don't agree with this. Of course the footage you're using poses its own limitations but it's too easy to put the blame on that. I'm the editor. Even if the footage is hard to work with it's my job to try to make it look interesting. So my advice to you editors out there (including the more experienced ones) is to put some actual effort into thinking about the criticism you get. Don't just blame things you're not responsible for. It's too easy and shows you're not really trying to think about it.

I'm going to assume your second paragraph was just a specific type of editor that annoys you and isn't an assumption of what I do, so I'm just going to go off your original question. I didn't really go into how I perceive criticism I get in my original post.

I already know all the problems in my amv, so when people point them out, it's kind of a reaffirmation, but it's also a "oh, that spot people have really been criticizing," so I take note of that; I'm consistently watching what people notice the most. I'm very "active" in that, even though I already know a lot of the points, I know when they do point out something, it really bothered them (unless they said otherwise) and so I'll guess why, or I'll just ask if they didn't say. I don't just pass over it because I already know it's bad, but from my experience, when people point out something, that's how they're viewing the amv. It's different for every amv, varying from more criticism in some to less in others, etc etc.I don't know if you see how I respond to criticism on my videos, but generally, the longer the comment they give me, the longer comment I'll give them, compared to others. I will address certain points in their comment if I disagree with them, and with the points I don't disagree with, I'll just say something like "I know, that spot was iffy/didn't know what to do/kinda just left it/" blahblah, just depends on the amv at the time. When someone proposes an issue with my amv that I don't know, then I'll address that in depth, probably ask questions. But I don't typically get this kind of criticism. I like when I do, because I can engage in a conversation, but most people leave very short comments on my videos, mentioning a few things they didn't like or just saying they liked it or didn't.

I like it that we can spend 100 hours on a single amv, buy expensive equipment and put a lot of effort into organizing cons. All this "for fun". But when you use half an hour to discuss some theoretical points on a forum you're taking amvs way too seriously Just to be clear, I'm obviously not trying to accuse you of anything. I just don't really get why, despite of the seemingly formal and argumentative form, engaging in theoretical discussions should be so serious. If I take part in such debates it's not because I think very highly of amvs but because I genuinely just enjoy discussing and analyzing things, even if it means engaging in debates. Not to downplay the truthfulness of people like myself who take part in these conversations, but it's so often just mental masturbation, or more like mental circle jerking as there are many people involved in the discussion I don't see the problem

Honestly, I haven't shelled out as much money as others have, and whatever I did, it was for fun. I can understand being "serious" about it if you're spending a ton of money on it, but that"s definitely not me I think everyone knows I make maybe one amv, with effort, once, max twice, a year, and all the other times I'm bored, so I use it to entertain myself. It's not that engaging in the discussion is serious, but for me, I'm not going to label my ideas a" theory". I don't know, it just comes off very formal and serious for a silly hobby of mine. Call it a peeve, but that's just me and I was simply commenting on that. And I don't see the problem with it either, which is why I replied, and am replying to others'. I don't mind your questions, and I'm not defending myself from them either, I just want to discuss. It's nice seeing what other people think.

@Kionon, I'm glad I could contribute to that then, and I agree with all your points. Just want to say, I've already mentioned why I don't like betatesters, but this is for my own videos. I rather like betatesting others' videos, and anyone who has done it knows that if you simply send me a pm, I give pretty long and in-depth criticism; I don't tell them they shouldn't ask for testers

@Pwolf, glad to see my views aren't too crazy then. I like that you brought up the fades thing, because I had the same thing happen to me, at least in one video. I used a lot of fades, and that's just how I interpreted the song, but now I do things quite differently as well, mainly just from having been brought to awareness of the issue in that amv, and then watching a lot of amvs.

@chaosgod Naw, the debate's good. Everyone is going to have every different views on this, so this is a topic that will last awhile, especially just in the community.

Taite wrote:@Pwolf, glad to see my views aren't too crazy then. I like that you brought up the fades thing, because I had the same thing happen to me, at least in one video. I used a lot of fades, and that's just how I interpreted the song, but now I do things quite differently as well, mainly just from having been brought to awareness of the issue in that amv, and then watching a lot of amvs.

Well, don't get ahead of yourself, we might still be crazy

Like the AMV .Org App? Think about donating to help me make it better.

Taite wrote:I'm going to assume your second paragraph was just a specific type of editor that annoys you and isn't an assumption of what I do, so I'm just going to go off your original question. I didn't really go into how I perceive criticism I get in my original post.

I already know all the problems in my amv, so when people point them out, it's kind of a reaffirmation, but it's also a "oh, that spot people have really been criticizing," so I take note of that; I'm consistently watching what people notice the most. I'm very "active" in that, even though I already know a lot of the points, I know when they do point out something, it really bothered them (unless they said otherwise) and so I'll guess why, or I'll just ask if they didn't say. I don't just pass over it because I already know it's bad, but from my experience, when people point out something, that's how they're viewing the amv. It's different for every amv, varying from more criticism in some to less in others, etc etc.I don't know if you see how I respond to criticism on my videos, but generally, the longer the comment they give me, the longer comment I'll give them, compared to others. I will address certain points in their comment if I disagree with them, and with the points I don't disagree with, I'll just say something like "I know, that spot was iffy/didn't know what to do/kinda just left it/" blahblah, just depends on the amv at the time. When someone proposes an issue with my amv that I don't know, then I'll address that in depth, probably ask questions. But I don't typically get this kind of criticism. I like when I do, because I can engage in a conversation, but most people leave very short comments on my videos, mentioning a few things they didn't like or just saying they liked it or didn't.

Yeah, the second paragraph definitely wasn't aimed at you. I was just trying to give an example of how one can passively just dodge criticism without giving much thought about it. Judging by your previous post I was under the assumption that all the criticism you've got you've already figured out by yourself, as if nobody ever looked at your work from a perspective you hadn't thought about before. I was just curious if you felt that was the case. And now that you responded I know that my impression was wrong and that wasn't the case

Honestly, I haven't shelled out as much money as others have, and whatever I did, it was for fun. I can understand being "serious" about it if you're spending a ton of money on it, but that"s definitely not me I think everyone knows I make maybe one amv, with effort, once, max twice, a year, and all the other times I'm bored, so I use it to entertain myself. It's not that engaging in the discussion is serious, but for me, I'm not going to label my ideas a" theory". I don't know, it just comes off very formal and serious for a silly hobby of mine. Call it a peeve, but that's just me and I was simply commenting on that. And I don't see the problem with it either, which is why I replied, and am replying to others'. I don't mind your questions, and I'm not defending myself from them either, I just want to discuss. It's nice seeing what other people think.

Well, I'm definitely with you there about the use of the word "theory". It sounds so bombastic I'm definitely not spending a lot of money on amvs either but, judging by the rig thread, I know many people have at least had amvs in mind when they've invested their money in such expensive equipment.

It's just that the immediate association of threads like this with "seriousness" caught me off guard. As if there were some actually heavy things at stake here. That kind of association tends to make threads like this look so pretentious. But, and I wonder if you would agree with me here, I also think there's another way to be pretentious as well. I'm thinking about the kind of attitude of "let's drop all this theory nonsense and just enjoy the hobby. It's all for fun and play!" OK, well, if it's all for fun and play then why won't you let people have their fun and let them have these discussions they obviously enjoy having? Why so serious? It's not like there's only one authentic way to do things and people are somehow diverting from it when they decide to reflect on it a little. "Theory" is a part of the experience.

But, and I wonder if you would agree with me here, I also think there's another way to be pretentious as well. I'm thinking about the kind of attitude of "let's drop all this theory nonsense and just enjoy the hobby. It's all for fun and play!" OK, well, if it's all for fun and play then why won't you let people have their fun and let them have these discussions they obviously enjoy having? Why so serious? It's not like there's only one authentic way to do things and people are somehow diverting from it when they decide to reflect on it a little. "Theory" is a part of the experience.

I don't think pretentious would be the right word. Saying that "This is the only right way, my opinion sums it all up, thread done," would be pretentious, but saying "drop the theory nonsense" is just an opinion. And again, don't really know if this is directed toward me , since I said "I say, just keep doing what you're doing. We're all fine with our small comments, or our stupidly detailed long ones, or our mean comments, blah blah. By all means, get together and discuss it things like this "theory", like we are here, but I don't feel like it's necessary to get wrapped up in it either (not that anybody is, but it's just too serious for my taste is all)" So like I said there, yeah, let people discuss. That's why I joined in too. :p

Emong wrote:But, and I wonder if you would agree with me here, I also think there's another way to be pretentious as well. I'm thinking about the kind of attitude of "let's drop all this theory nonsense and just enjoy the hobby. It's all for fun and play!"

DJ_Izumi wrote:This thread makes me kinda miss the days when you could put Evangelion to the theme to Top Gun, and people would just shut up and enjoy it. :X

I'm thinking perhaps this is where it was directed at.

Like the AMV .Org App? Think about donating to help me make it better.

I should probably be more clear what's directed at whom to avoid all these misunderstandings. I was thinking mainly of the drama in Phantasmagoriat's thread a while back. The thread was titled in a really bombastic way, like "Truth about AMVs" or something similar. Too lazy to dig it up right now.

Taite wrote:since I said "I say, just keep doing what you're doing. We're all fine with our small comments, or our stupidly detailed long ones, or our mean comments, blah blah. By all means, get together and discuss it things like this "theory", like we are here, but I don't feel like it's necessary to get wrapped up in it either (not that anybody is, but it's just too serious for my taste is all)" So like I said there, yeah, let people discuss. That's why I joined in too. :p

This is why I was wondering that you might agree with me, because you don't have anything against discussions like this